2022 House and Senate election

Tulsi Gabbard to campaign for Don Boulduc (Republican nominee for Senate in New Hampshire). Link. Sorry folks, but this is bizarre. You can like what she says, but seriously, her congressional voting record is terrible. She was a Congressional Progressive Caucus darling. This would almost be like AOC leaving the party and courting the Right.
 
If the debate happens, Oz will need to totally avoid Fetterman’s health issues. Just let the audio make judgment. I’ll avoid a post about democrats new tactic of avoiding public debates.
 
theiioftx said:
If the debate happens, Oz will need to totally avoid Fetterman’s health issues. Just let the audio make judgment. I’ll avoid a post about democrats new tactic of avoiding public debates.
Click to expand...

Agree. I thought the ridiculing about it was really dumb. One of Oz's strengths was that he was a nice guy. People liked him. It just made him look like an *** to make a point that is self-evident. In the debate, he should basically ignore the issue.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Agree. I thought the ridiculing about it was really dumb. One of Oz's strengths was that he was a nice guy. People liked him. It just made him look like an *** to make a point that is self-evident. In the debate, he should basically ignore the issue.
Click to expand...
There is this:
 
" Virginia Democrats to introduce legislation that would allow parents who don’t affirm their child’s “gender identity” to be criminally prosecuted."
How many voters could this possibly attract?
 
Mr. Deez said:
Agree. I thought the ridiculing about it was really dumb. One of Oz's strengths was that he was a nice guy. People liked him. It just made him look like an *** to make a point that is self-evident. In the debate, he should basically ignore the issue.
Click to expand...
I disagree that it was a mistake. Proofs in the pudding - Oz went from double digits back, to close or leading, mostly on the fact that voters don't want a brain dead carrot as their Senator.

That topic doesn't get out for debate without Oz bringing it up, himself. Lord knows the media wouldn't - those suck asses would clean the drool off the Zombie's chin during an interview. And Oz couldn't have staffers or surrogates bring it up first - the media would have demanded that he denounce those meanie comments from his people, and the temptation would be to hang them out to dry via denouement / firing.

Oz bringing up the fact that Uncle Fester is brain dead puts the topic out, then lets people on his side pick it up and run with it, knowing the candidate himself has staked his claim to the topic, and that he has the back of others who'll bring it up.

Compare and contrast that with Mittens meekly drawing a circle on the chalkboard and putting his nose in it during the second debate with Obama, when he and Fatty Crowley planned out exactly when and how they were going to "go to the videotape. Go to the videotape!".

Oz is in it to win it, unlike cucks like Mittens or McShitStain in 12 and 08, and that fires the base up, which Oz needed to do after a bruising primary in which he only got a 1/3 of the vote.

Now he doesn't have to bring it up anymore, the topic is out there and at the top of the issues, bringing the Zombie down. But none of this happens if Oz didn't broach the subject first.
 
Last edited:
Duck Dodgers said:
I disagree that it was a mistake. Proofs in the pudding - Oz went from double digits back, to close or leading, mostly on the fact that voters don't want a brain dead carrot as their Senator.

That topic doesn't get out for debate without Oz bringing it up, himself. Lord knows the media wouldn't - those suck asses would clean the drool off the Zombie's chin during an interview. And Oz couldn't have staffers or surrogates bring it up first - the media would have demanded that he denounce those meanie comments from his people, and the temptation would be to hang them out to dry via denouement / firing.

Oz bringing up the fact that Uncle Fester is brain dead puts the topic out, then lets people on his side pick it up and run with it, knowing the candidate himself has staked his claim to the topic, and that he has the back of others who'll bring it up.

Compare and contrast that with Mittens meekly drawing a circle on the chalkboard and putting his nose in it during the second debate with Obama, when he and Fatty Crowley planned out exactly when and how they were going to "go to the videotape. Go to the videotape!".

Oz is in it to win it, unlike cucks like Mittens or McShitStain in 12 and 08, and that fires the base up, which Oz needed to do after a bruising primary in which he only got a 1/3 of the vote.

Now he doesn't have to bring it up anymore, the topic is out there and at the top of the issues, bringing the Zombie down. But none of this happens if Oz didn't broach the subject first.
Click to expand...

There's nothing wrong with bringing it up. That wasn't the issue.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Tulsi Gabbard to campaign for Don Boulduc (Republican nominee for Senate in New Hampshire). Link. Sorry folks, but this is bizarre. You can like what she says, but seriously, her congressional voting record is terrible. She was a Congressional Progressive Caucus darling. This would almost be like AOC leaving the party and courting the Right.
Click to expand...

The seat is semi-vulnerable and the people who would switch parties have a pretty moderate candidate in Boulduc. However, this seems to be a recurring theme in conservative media circles: a Republican congressman who votes with the party leader 98% of the time is a RINO, while a Democrat who votes with the party leader 60% of the time is practically AOC. Anything to the left of a RINO is a radical communist.
 
Horns11 said:
The seat is semi-vulnerable and the people who would switch parties have a pretty moderate candidate in Boulduc. However, this seems to be a recurring theme in conservative media circles: a Republican congressman who votes with the party leader 98% of the time is a RINO, while a Democrat who votes with the party leader 60% of the time is practically AOC. Anything to the left of a RINO is a radical communist.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I follow. First, Boulduc isn't a moderate. Second, Gabbard didn't vote with the party 60 percent of the time. She was a much more reliable vote than that, and when she broke with her party, it was usually to go further left. She was much more of a Bernie Sanders than she was a Kyrsten Sinema.
 
Mr. Deez said:
I actually don't have a problem with this kind of fact check. The ad is pretty deceptive if the guy was released because he has served his my time. My problem is they largely show the other side to BS without calling them on it.
Click to expand...
Interesting how they place emphasis on the November 2021 discharge date but decline to point out that the killing occurred in June 2021.
 
Mr D
I guess I am confused. It says the murderer was released EARLY and he did murder his girlfriend right away.
so what is deceptive?
 
Horn6721 said:
Mr D
I guess I am confused. It says the murderer was released EARLY and he did murder his girlfriend right away.
so what is deceptive?
Click to expand...
Something else I found questionable in the report was how they parsed the release certificate. I cannot speak to other States but I know even when we had the Prison Management Act releases in Texas in the late 80's, the Proclamation made no reference to the release having been under or due to PMA credits- it just simply was a Certificate of Parole or Certificate of Mandatory Supervision.

The news account ALSO seems to suggest that anyone released on a date other than the Governor's April 2020 Order was not a release created BY that Order, never mind that a review takes time to determine who is actually eligible FOR a release...

I believe the ad is something that falls in the category of what Snopes would have called "Mostly True" back in the day before they became beholden to sponsor dollars.
 
Mr. Deez said:
But was he released because of the governor? They at least suggest that he wasn't.
Click to expand...
The Order is viewable at https://www.governor.state.nm.us/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/EO_2020_021.pdf

It seems somewhat akin to the old PMA credits which kicked in when certain capacity thresholds were hit. And that could also have explained the second release, especially if NM has anything like the original Texas mandatory supervision elements where flat time and good time created an earlier release date (this became discretionary post-September 1996).
 
mb227 said:
The Order is viewable at https://www.governor.state.nm.us/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/EO_2020_021.pdf

It seems somewhat akin to the old PMA credits which kicked in when certain capacity thresholds were hit. And that could also have explained the second release, especially if NM has anything like the original Texas mandatory supervision elements where flat time and good time created an earlier release date (this became discretionary post-September 1996).
Click to expand...
Seems to me the gov order set the ball rolling to release as many prisoners as possible, regardless what documents were produced, etc. And that is how I interpreted the ad the first time.
 
mchammer said:
Seems to me the gov order set the ball rolling to release as many prisoners as possible, regardless what documents were produced, etc. And that is how I interpreted the ad the first time.
Click to expand...
Yep...Fetterman in a dress as it relates to prison population.

And without a meaningful review of criminal history and offense reports, you get releases which should NEVER have happened prior to an eligibility date and Board decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

Back
Top